DanDaMan wrote:This explains my position on modern Liberals in America.
And what exactly does that have to do with gay marriage?
This isn't a Liberal vs. Conservative issue. Actually, its an issue that crosses the political spectrum from neocons like Dick Cheney to Modern Liberals such as Kerry, to Libertarians like Ron Paul. Though Ron Paul's stance is only for it for the same reason I am for it, it just isn't the government's place to be in the marriage buisness. that is between you and your lover.
Besides, that video is so old that its old, rusty and moldy.
Dave wrote: Romance is not a private matter as it has social effects.
Just too questions:
1) Since when was it not a private matter?
2) What are the social affects? And why do they matter?
This is one of many reasons why nearly every known society has seen fit to regulate romance.
Yeah because we really need to mimic countries like Iran. When Iran is about equal when it comes to transgender rights to the USA, then you know that there is a problem and red flags should be raised.
When we start to regulate romance, what differentiates the USA from Iran? They do the same.
I will die in a war of expatriotism before i give up my rights to keep what me and my wife do a private matter. As for gays, I am sure they and lesbians would do the same.
I will disown my country as soon as it gives up the rights that are so basic, and starts acting like governments such as Iran. I will disown it so fast its not funny.
"Fairness" is only the concern of liberal psychopaths seeking to use such positive feeling buzzwords to mask their aggression against the traditional order of mankind. They will never be satisfied until they have destroyed everything and as such should simply be ignored.
Statements like these explain exactly your malfunction, and no they are not psychopaths, and in spite of your absolute refusal to accept this, they are people and just have different values and moral standards than you. So do we libertarians.
DanDaMan wrote:[]Romance is not a private matter as it has social effects. This is one of many reasons why nearly every known society has seen fit to regulate romance. "Fairness" is only the concern of liberal psychopaths seeking to use such positive feeling buzzwords to mask their aggression against the traditional order of mankind. They will never be satisfied until they have destroyed everything and as such should simply be ignored.[]
True.
But you make it sound like a malicious intent by Liberals!
Malicious intent by Liberals? What's with you and trashing liberals? And no its not true, it is a private matter. I am straight, but still, my romance is a private matter and i want to keep it that way. I am sure the men and they male boyfriends feel the same way, as their romance is a private matter as well. It wouldn't have any social effects if you people didn't hammer images into peoples heads of why they should (falsely) fear gays being allowed to marry.
Those social affects are: Hatred, murder, and so on. The kind of things we saw in Nazi Germany. But you said you were fascist, so that explains everything.
The reality is a pursuit of Utopia where no one can do no wrong.
No one is discussing Utopia. That's for the mythology section, Utopia does not and can not exist, we all know, but this is specifically about gay marriage.
Basically their good intentions are the road to Hell.
Hell is a mythological place that doesn't exist in my beliefs, so how does that fit into this debate?
Invictus_88 wrote:Hey, Dan.
Why did you float this issue if you've no intention to acknowledge people responding to your position?
Either answer, and discuss, or sod off.
What else did you expect from the republicans to scream christian morals then have adulterous affairs in places like Argentina?